It’s been over 100 days since you
promised to sign Form 180, yet you have not. I imagine this
is either because you still have something to hide or because you lost the
form.

Personally, I figure it’s because
you’re still hiding from your military record. But since I’m a Republican (you turned me out in 2004), others might
deem that unfair, so in the interest of giving you the benefit of the doubt, I am
forwarding the forms for your completion, complete with instructions.

I expect we’ll be hearing the news
of your signing soon? The blogosphere
anxiously awaits.

August 24, 2004

Ever sharp his pen, Cristopher Hitchens lets loose on Kerry and the Democrats in his latest article, Not so Swift.

Hitchens wonders how Kerry could think his former critics would remain silent as he made his Vietnam military record a basis for his Presidential aspirations. In a juxtaposition of Kerry's 1971 testimony before Congress and a recent photograph of Kerry shouldering a rocket launcher with William Rood of the Chicago Tribune, Hitchens writes:

On that previous occasion [Congressional testimony], Kerry was using his service as a warrior to acquire credentials as an antiwarrior. Now, [rocket launcher photo] he is cashing in the same credentials to propose himself as alliance-builder and commander in chief. This is not a distinction without a difference.

Indeed it is not. On Thursday, April 22, 1971 , Kerry testified before Congress that he witnessed and accessorily participated in rape, amputation, decapitation, torture, and much worse, all in an effort to harness the popular anti-war movement as support for his budding political career. Thirty-five years later, at a time when we are at war with a formidable enemy, Kerry again offers up this very same military record, now as a basis for the war-time leadership he thinks he could provide as President. That's one durable military record, to be stretched to such extremes. It's also disengenous at best, and a recipe for an appeasement approach to overcoming the terrorism that threatens you and me at worst.

Hitchens goes on to make light of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9-11, would-you-send-your-son-to-Iraq approach to ginning up anti-war-in-Iraq sentiment. Hitchens points out that it’s not much of a leap from “would you send your son to Iraq?” to “only veterans or potential veterans have license to comment on matters of war.” Based on Moore’s line of thinking, if only veterans or potential veterans have room to comment on war matters, what’s wrong with swift boat veterans calling Kerry a traitor? If the shoe fits…

Hitchens closes the article by casting any uncritical approval of Kerry on the basis of his military record as unapologetic idiocy,

They [myopic Kerry supporters] have also implicitly subverted one of the most important principles of the republic, which is civilian control over military decisions. And more than that, they have done something eye-rubbingly unprincipled, doing what Reagan and Kissinger could not do: rehabilitating the notion of the Vietnam horror as "a noble cause."

In a correct perspective, the horror of Vietnam is John F. Kerry, a horror best left in our past.

Update, 8/24/2004, 10:46 MDT: Speaking of swifties, Drudge Reports that Kerry put in a call to Robert Brant Cdr. USN (Ret.) Sunday night. Apparently, Kerry asked Brant why the swift boat vets oppose his candidacy. Brant replied, "You should know what you said when you came back, the impact it had on the young sailors and how it was disrespectful of our guys that were killed over there."

Kerry went on to say that his 1971 Congressional testimony did not impune his fellow swift boaters, but instead, "all the rest of the veterans."

"I know that as president there's huge leverage that will be available to me, enormous cards to play, and I'm not going to play them in public. I'm not going to play them before I'm president."

Has Kerry flipped over himself again? Has he gone and played one of his "enormous cards" against the Lt. Cmdr. to shut him up swiftly shore up his sinking campaign? Ok, maybe this guy didn't require an enormous card, but what else could explain Elliott's backflips on this...?

Update: The Kerry campaign is threatening legal action against this...